TRUE OR FALSE - It's always OK to go to war...?

Question

It's always OK to go to war if you can convince a majority of the citizens and their representatives that war is the best option without using any deception

Paul T wrote:
"War and deception go hand in hand. There is never war and cannot be war without deception.

"If the majority of citizens can be convinced that war is the best option then this will only ever occur through deception.

"Truth is the first casualty!"

He's on the right track! I think war is always OK if you can convince more than half of the people (and their democratic representatives) to go to war without using any lies or coercion. Of course, the only time that would realistically ever happen is if some other country is already waging war against your country! Because otherwise the majority of people will see war as too risky and the chance of avoiding it as too tempting not to lose hope for.

Answer 1

T

Answer 2

What a question! War's are not fought because a bunch of people get together and decide "we're bored today, let's start a war."

Wars are the accomplishment of national objectives when peaceful means fail. Sometimes that national objective may be the national survival; i.e., the country is attacked. Your question seems to imply that, say, if Russian nuked us tomorrow we should take a poll or vote to see if we should 1) surrender or 2) fight back.

Maybe another way to state the first part of your question is "Is it a just war if..." There has been quite a bit of philosophical, moral, and military analysis of Just War Theory, starting back with the Greek philosophers and continuing today at places like National Defense University and the Army War College.

There are two parts to Just War Theory. The first part deals with whether war is justified - whether it is right to go to war. Your question is a (rare) subset of this branch. The other deals with how the war is fought - the Law of War, or whether the way the war is fought is fair.

There is no part of Just War Theory that says approval of the majority is an okay reason to go to war. And your "no deception" caveat doesn't really add much, because who is the judge of what is and is not deception? Hitler said Germany should rule the world; the majority of German citizens agreed with him. Was he "deceiving" them - i.e., did he really know that Germany should not rule the world? I don't think so. He was honest (albeit immoral) in that belief.

So my answer is a definite NO.

Answer 3

Your premise is flawed.

The answer to your question is "false," but it's constructed in such a way as to prevent any other answer.

Your line is telling: "Of course, the only time that would realistically ever happen is if some other country is already waging war against your country!"

Newsflash to the liberals in this country - Islamic fascists have been waging war against this country - and the whole of the Western world - for the past 30 years.

True, war is not always justified: Hitler had no right to invade the Sudetenland. But 3,000 innocent lives incinerated in one day on the East Coast, in most logical frames of reference, consitutes a declaration of war against our country.

The Bush administration is pursuing war against Isalmic totalitarians that prop up terrorist ideologies in the Middle East, and why not - we're the most powerful nation on earth, and what greatre good could we do than to eradicate terrorism in the world?

Liberals think if only we get the terrorists enough money and land they'll leave us alone. Wrong - terrorists want us DEAD, and they will stop at nothing - literally nothing - until we are all - all of us - stone cold dead.

Answer 4

War and deception go hand in hand. There is never war and cannot be war without deception.

If the majority of citizens can be convinced that war is the best option then this will only ever occur through deception.

Truth is the first casualty!

There is always a bigger picture, another story, a hidden strategy, and we, "the citizens" are never kept aware of this by "our representatives".

Answer 5

War is never ok...necessary yes...unavoidable, sometimes...but never ok.
Truth from our "democratic representatives"?
That is an oxymoron, my friend, much like "military intelligence". Remember, this country was founded on truth, equality and RELIGIOUS FREEDOM (ie, the right to express oneself and religious beliefs and convictions) but because we have allowed the judicial branch to rule the country, we have a bunch of lawyers running the show, liars who can "convience and be convienced" that war is a viable option and should be undertaken.
War is a last resort, used when there is no other choice. Good question, though and it will spark debate, productive I hope.

Answer 6

There was no deception in the wars between Scotland and England in the 13th and 14th centuries..England wanted Scotland and Scotland wanted to stay independent.and the answer to your question which was a good one,is yes when the reason is to protect your homeland where the possibility is apparent that the other nation in question has the capability to occupy your homeland.Unfortunately the wars today are not that cut and dry..

Answer 7

When dealing with a large group of people there is never a B&W answer because the will never be 2 people that 100% agree. That
being said there will always be wars and rumors of war, some
times you just don't have the luxury of a choice. Coming from a place that was the sight of some of the worst atrocities of WW2 I can tell you that turning the other cheek some times gets you slapped again.

Answer 8

NOT OK. War has always caused nothing but destruction and brought great sorrow and hardship to mankind whenever and where ever it was fought. It has to be the real last resort if all other peaceful methods of resolution have not yielded results.Steps to convince people and have public support for war follow. There is no guarantee that deception will not be used. In fact modern day warfare or at least most of it is nothing but deception.

Answer 9

false.
but your statement is also not a good enough reason to go to war.

simply put, you go to war for treasure, revenge, or to kill someone before they can muster the force to kill you. Does not matter if a majority or a minority makes the decision.

The USA has never gone to war for treasure alone, although we did early on enjoy the concessions of war. We have gone to war for revenge, like when Stephen Decatur led the marines into Tripoli against the Barbary Pirates.

The American revolution was supported and fought by only 1/3 the population. Yet they went to war and won. Cromwell went to war with 1/5 the ruling class behind him, yet won...only to loose the peace.

Answer 10

War is always the LAST option. If diplomacy doesn't work or those 'wonderful' U.N. resolutions *snicker* then I guess you do have to try to garner support for the decision to go to war. I would have to say false if the other avenues have not been explored.
Have a great day!!!

Answer 11

False... Wars are not necessarily the best way, it appears to me that Leaders decide on the war and everyone else fights it in most cases.
It would seem that in this day in age, we could resolve an issue differently.